In the comment section of my last piece, a familiar phrase appeared, issued in a suitably derisive tone. That phrase? “The United States is a Nation of Immigrants (NOI).” I mistakenly noted that it was Edward Kennedy who first uttered it during the debate over Hart-Celler in 1965. As is common of the Kennedy boys, they get phrases attributed to them that they themselves were quoting. I’m reminded of one of Bobby’s (and my) favorite utterances: “Some men see things as they are and ask ‘why?’ I dream of things that never were and ask, ‘why not.’” Just as Bobby was credited with authorship of what was actually a George Bernard Shaw quote, so too did I mistakenly give Teddy credit for something John Kennedy wrote in 1958, in a book published by the (((ADL))) to raise his national profile for the 1960 election.
The general thrust of the (((argument))) is that aside from the natives, we all came here from somewhere and thus the United States is a nation of immigrants. This is laughable on its face because that’s theoretically true of just about everywhere on the face of the Earth on some level or another, save the original ancestors of Homo Sapiens in Europe. This is true even of the natives, of course, who crossed into the Americas during the last Ice Age. It’s a simple concept: people were in one place. Then, they moved somewhere else. But unless we are talking about people moving from one area, developed or not developed, it does not really matter. We are talking about settlers. Uncharted virgin territory does not get immigrated to. It gets conquered. Our ancestors did not immigrate with a suitcase and a green card to Dixie, but rather with a pick, axe and hoe and they carved out a nation from the wilderness that they could hand down to us. We’re now a nation that is under threat because of anti-white doggerel such as NOI.
Whatever guilt trip can be laid on white Europeans for settling North America, and there is not much, even less can be placed on our ancestors. As sparsely populated as the North American continent was, between .96 and 1.37 persons per square mile in what is now the US and Canada, it was even less populated in what is now Dixieland. The Cherokee had an apogee population which maxed out at 50,000 in the 1690’s. The Seminole numbered 25,000. There were obviously many more tribes, but the point is that if two of the larger ones numbered in five figures, we’re talking extremely low population density, even by the standards of the continent as a whole.
It cannot be said that the forebears of Dixie stole the land from the natives, because there was too much land and too few people. But even if they did…so what? There was no civilization to speak of, as there was in Mexico and Peru. The population of the South was, at most, a few hundred thousand people in a territory of something north of 2 million square miles. For those interested, I’m basing my figure on the fact that the CSA at its inception was just shy of 2 million sq. mi., but Kentucky, Missouri and West Virginia would see the error of their ways this time around.
The population fell in the South, as it did everywhere else upon European contact, due to disease and war. By the time of our “national shame” occurred, the Trail of Tears which ethnically cleansed the South, to borrow a phrase from the Clinton administration, only amounted to the removal of 15,000 persons. That’s certainly not how it’s represented in the history books, and every young child has the idea that this was some sort of Naziesque genocide beaten into him or her. The narrative continues that because our country was founded on theft and forced relocation, we should smile and open our arms to persons who seek to do the same to us.
But, that is not the reality. Aside from a few isolated incidents of deliberate infection, the “genocide” which occurred due to European diseases was largely accidental. The Spaniards had no interest in killing off the natives, because they were looking for a place to conquer and rule in absentia, not to settle. The Anglo settled in hard scrabble places that had not developed to any significant extent and thus “killed” far fewer people. That’s not to say there were not military encounters. Conflicts arose, and the natives almost always lost. True of every group of people everywhere on earth, but when the white man wins, we are told that this is wrong.
History lesson now complete, let us return to the phrase “Nation of Immigrants,” particularly as it pertains to the South. An immigrant is a person who goes from a settled place to a settled place. A settler is someone who goes from a settled place to an unsettled one. Jamestown, Virginia, was a colony of settlers. Not immigrants. All of the early colonies were comprised as such. The Yanks, with the trappings of larger commercial cities and the beginnings of industry, had more immigration than the South, but still not anywhere close enough to call it a nation of immigrants. Much as I’d like to, because fuck the Yankees.
When the nation was 90%+ white, there was a uniformity of culture in a given region of the country. This allowed assimilation because it merely required a hearty work ethic and the ability to make the country better than the current generation found it. In a nation of 60% (and falling) whites, there is no impetus to adhere to the dominant culture. We see many competing cultures, all of which hate the still dominant white one. The only thing required of current immigrants, as far as assimilation is concerned, is that they buy into the bugman consumer culture, purchasing and consuming mountains of crap. Bonus points if they’re willing to send their son to die for Israel.
The immigration system worked until the frontier closed around the end of the 19th century, at which time, the government was wise enough to recognize that immigration should be strictly curtailed. There was no more land to conquer, no new civilized areas to carve from nothing, so strict quotas became the rule of the day, and even then, only allowed white people. At no point was this continent open to non-white immigration, save for a handful of Chinese laborers used to build the railroad because the tyrant Lincoln had the Irish otherwise engaged subjugating a sovereign Dixie. The Jewish globalists flipped the script in the 50’s because they realized that for their scheme to work, white societies had to be undermined. The best way to do that was to make them less white. Enter the philanderer John Kennedy and NOI.
In truth, had there been any serious form of immigration, or even native population from which to draw, the Peculiar Institution, for which we, the heirs of Dixie, receive so much flak, might never have existed in any serious numbers. Certainly, it did not become widespread among the damn Yankees, who, as noted, had a steadier stream of immigration. Slavery came into vogue in the South because there was no source of wage labor. By the time the Irish started showing up in the 1830’s, the practice was too well established and profitable to justify switching over to wage labor. Alas. France and England might have gotten off their duffs had a South without slaves been the reality. And, we would not be dealing with the fallout of ungrateful descendants to this day.
Part of reclaiming everything is the recognition that as the scions of conquerors, we should hold our heads high, proud of what our ancestors achieved. And work to continue to build on what we inherited so that our descendants can say the same of us. As a great man once said, “We do not inherit land from our fathers. We borrow it from our great, great grandchildren.” The boomers dropped the ball on this, choosing instead mindless consumerism and petty luxury.
It stands to us to pick up the fallen standard and move it forward once more. Deo Vindice.